Foreign policy questions loom in the background

three weeks for the elections, LESS THAN the campaign for presidential-parliamentary elections is in full swing. So far, there has been a notable lack of debate about foreign policy. Is this normal? Many would say yes. Elections usually focus on bread-and-butter issues that are the essence of domestic politics. Voters accord secondary status to foreign policy unless the country faces an external problem that affects domestic prosperity or it is involved in an external conflict where calls for “national unity” prevail.

The lack of debate on foreign policy does not point to a lack of important problems. In fact, some major problems have been mentioned in passing in this or that part of the campaign. An example of a case where domestic and international politics is intertwined is that of the Syrian refugees. Since the majority comes from Syria, the problem is called Syrian but it covers Afghanis, Pakistanis, Bangladeshis and others that have managed one way or another to enter Turkiye, find gainful employment and entertain no intention to leave except possibly to points West. The opposition has promised that Syrian refugees will be sent back to their homeland within two years. How? Presumably by negotiating with the Syrian government. I fear that Syrian government does not share the enthusiasm of the Turkish opposition in taking their kin back. If the new government is formed by the opposition, they may find that implementing their promise will not be easy. Measures to prevent the influx of more refugees into Turkiye may well be successful, however, since current border controls are noted for their laxity.

The opposition has also made clear that it is deeply interested in restoring the membership process for joining the EU. Since public opinion polls have shown that there is renewed interest in becoming a part of the EU, the choice is in line with public expectations. Steps in rekindling ties and rejuvenating negotiations may be facilitated by the fact that the opposition is running on a restoring liberal democracy, rule of law, independence of courts and respecting international commitments platform. Whereas membership negotiations are likely to suffer from a lack of will on the part of the EU that can easily hide behind Turkiye’s unwillingness to recognize Cyprus, progress on visa free travel and a revision of the customs union may be more readily implemented.

The opposition has also indicated that it is interested in reconstituting a healthier relationship with alliance partners. Approving of Sweden’s membership in NATO might constitute a beginning point. Since the constitutional changes Sweden has made to accommodate Turkiye’s complaints about its harboring terrorists and offering a home to terrorism will go into effect at the beginning of June, a positive gesture on the Turkiye’s part may be possible. Such a gesture may also have positive effects its relations with the US. One of the major sticking points between the two countries, the purchase of S-400 missiles from Russia and the subsequent cancellation of Turkiye’s participation in the F-35 project will have to be addressed. If the government does change, the Americans may drop their insistence that the S-400s be sent out of the country and accept their being mothballed within Turkiye accompanied by confirmation that it will not buy any more such weapons. If the S-400 conflict is moved out of the agenda, it may also be possible that Turkiye will be able to import new F-16s and possibly F-35s, thereby removing another issue of contention. Justifiably, Turkiye has been complaining that the informal NATO rule about observing a balance between arming Greece and Turkiye has recently been discarded in favor of the former.

As is well known, there are other outstanding American-Turkish disagreements. In Syria, Turkiye complains that the Americans are making common cause with a terrorist organization whose affiliates conduct operations in Turkiye. Americans complain that Turkiye is not sufficiently sensitive in implementing its economic embargos against Russia. The two countries do not see eye to eye in how relations with Iran should be carried. These are some of the outstanding issues that need to be addressed. Since not all can be successfully concluded, the question becomes whether the two countries will be able to manage their differences on a friendly basis.

The opposition has announced that a large amount of foreign capital is ready to come into Turkiye, waiting for the government to change. It is true that foreign capital has been shy of Turkiye in view of the current unorthodox economic policies, the erosion of the rule of law and the practice of extensive corruption. It would be optimistic to expect that once the government changes, funds would start flowing in. Investors might first want to make sure that the grounds for their hesitation are fully removed.

While not fully covered in everyday campaign talk, questions of external politics do not go away. They just loom in the background. No government will afford to ignore them once elections are over.